Slashdot Mirror


Woman Says Alexa Device Recorded Her Private Conversation and Sent It To Random Contact; Amazon Confirms the Incident (kiro7.com)

Gary Horcher, reporting for KIRO7: A Portland family contacted Amazon to investigate after they say a private conversation in their home was recorded by Amazon's Alexa -- the voice-controlled smart speaker -- and that the recorded audio was sent to the phone of a random person in Seattle, who was in the family's contact list. "My husband and I would joke and say I'd bet these devices are listening to what we're saying," said Danielle, who did not want us to use her last name. Every room in her family home was wired with the Amazon devices to control her home's heat, lights and security system. But Danielle said two weeks ago their love for Alexa changed with an alarming phone call. "The person on the other line said, 'unplug your Alexa devices right now,'" she said. '"You're being hacked.'" That person was one of her husband's employees, calling from Seattle. "We unplugged all of them and he proceeded to tell us that he had received audio files of recordings from inside our house," she said. "At first, my husband was, like, 'no you didn't!' And the (recipient of the message) said 'You sat there talking about hardwood floors.' And we said, 'oh gosh, you really did hear us.'" Danielle listened to the conversation when it was sent back to her, and she couldn't believe someone 176 miles away heard it too. In a statement, an Amazon spokesperson said, "Amazon takes privacy very seriously. We investigated what happened and determined this was an extremely rare occurrence. We are taking steps to avoid this from happening in the future."

Further reading: Amazon Admits Its AI Alexa is Creepily Laughing at People.

26 of 272 comments (clear)

  1. LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Amazon takes privacy very seriously."

    Obviously not.

    1. Re: LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      That is why I only use Alexa in my bathroom where I do not typically have private conversations.

    2. Re: LOL by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 5, Funny

      That is why I only use Alexa in my bathroom where I do not typically have private conversations.

      Your health insurance company will be canceling your policy real soon because of . . . "excessive flatulence" . . .

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    3. Re:LOL by jellomizer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You can be very serious about privacy, but incompetent enough to not be able to do anything good about it.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    4. Re:LOL by Obfuscant · · Score: 5, Informative

      You can be very serious about privacy, but incompetent enough to not be able to do anything good about it.

      Or you can be serious about privacy and design a complicated system that is intended to operate on voice commands that sometimes gets things wrong.

      The Fine Article is so completely devoid of details as to be useless. There is not a single mention of why this happened. Did the owners say something that sounded like "Alexa", and something that sounded like "send this to Frank"? Or was it something else? The Alexa I have consistently responded when it heard someone refer to Alexi Lalas on the TV. It also responded when the police scanner reported that a Lexus was being pulled over. This doesn't seem like an outrageous mistake to me. Did those people say something that was misinterpreted?

      This is how bad the article is: it first says the recording was sent to a random person in Seattle, THEN it says it was someone on their contact list. Random, not random. Same sentence.

      Maybe someday /. will start linking to technically relevant information in technical stories, instead of clickbait TV station pages.

  2. It's not paranoia if it actually happens by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You're nuts to have any of these devices in your house, or at the very least, plugged into power when you're not actively using it.

    1. Re:It's not paranoia if it actually happens by RobinH · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I agree, but what's the difference between that and a cell phone? It's always on, can be always listening (must be since I can say "Ok Google" to wake it up) and has an internet connection and a list of contacts. No doubt it's also looking for keywords in the conversations it hears and logs that for targeting advertising.

      --
      "I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
    2. Re:It's not paranoia if it actually happens by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Then get a phone that has a removable battery and take the battery out when you want privacy. :-)
      Or better yet don't have a smartphone in the first place, use the cheapest clamshell phone you can get that's good at making and receiving calls, and leave it turned off when you don't need it, too, just in case.

      I've never owned a smartphone and never will, primarily because I really don't have a use for the capabilities, but also because I think they're too expensive for what you get, too expensive to operate (I don't want to give $100 or more a month to anyone just to have a phone), as well as a total swisscheese/collander so far as being secure goes (can't secure the browser properly, well-known ways to remotely hack them, tracks you everywhere via GPS, and so on). My life is just fine without one, too. Doesn't anyone else remember life before there were smartphones? We all lived just fine. ;-)

    3. Re:It's not paranoia if it actually happens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      At least on the phone you can disable "OK Google" and still use the device for its primary purpose; if you disable Alexa's voice activation then the device is pretty useless.

    4. Re:It's not paranoia if it actually happens by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 4, Informative

      My life is just fine without one, too. Doesn't anyone else remember life before there were smartphones? We all lived just fine. ;-)

      Yeah, I do. I used to brag about not having one.

      It was fine, mostly ... except for all that getting lost, and getting stuck in traffic jams that I could have avoided had I only known. And never having a camera handy when I needed one. And not being able to instantly compare prices while in a store. And ... and ... and ...

      Now, a home device, on the other hand, designed for solely voice interface, I'm not seeing the benefit. I'm home, after all. I have a PC and can do precisely what I want, without an insanely clunky interface. And more importantly not do what I don't want.

  3. It's really no surprise by kelemvor4 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm really not one of those people who fear new technology or anything of the sort. However, how can it not eventually go horribly wrong when you plant recording devices in your own house that are designed specifically record and send the audio offsite. Eventually, there will be mistakes made with the audio or a hack, or something you said will violate some law "forcing" the company who has the recording to do some particular thing with it.

    I'm all for new technology, but these things should have bad idea written all over them in bold print.... and I don't mean that to be specific to Amazon, either. Apple and Google's take on the things are just as bad.

    More people should make an effort to understand what their personal electronics actually do before purchasing. We (as a society) need to incorporate classes on this sort of thing into primary education classes.

  4. wire tap on sexy time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I received one of these messages just a week ago. Alexa sent me a message of my friend and his girlfriend having a private moment. I immediately texted him to ask if he intended to do that and he did not- so weird.

  5. Getting people to care by Bradmont · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I've been thinking for a while that this is the kind of thing that needs to happen more to get people to actually care about their privacy. Maybe a timed worm that'll gradually install itself on all sorts of these devices, and all at once start sharing recorded conversations with strangers. Or a smartphone virus that randomly takes pictures of people while they're facebooking on the toilet and posts them.

  6. What about everything else with a microphone? by Dzimas · · Score: 4, Insightful

    My phone has several very good microphones, as does my computer. Both devices also have extremely good cameras. It seems silly to focus on devices like Alexa and Google Home when they have relatively small market penetration and are less capable of spying on us than the cellular and GPS-equipped monitoring devices we slip into our pockets whenever we go *anywhere*.

    1. Re:What about everything else with a microphone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm the administrator of my computer and my phone, both happen to be running open source OSs, and I make sure the phone is locked down and the computer's microphones are disabled. Even without their microphone and/or without an internet data connection, these devices are still useful.

      On the other hand, Google Home and Alexa are devices explicitly made for relying info on us to 3rd parties. We can't manage them to the same level. We simply can't use them in any meaningful manner when they're not relying information.

      Besides, OPs entire argument is faulty. So because there a possibility other devices have problems we should ignore and encourage faulty devices? The 'logic' can be continued: "No point in patching our systems, there must be some zero-day bugs". "No point in locking our doors so long as the windows are made of breakable glass". "Why bother arresting petty criminals so long as kingpins walk free?". We have to begin somewhere.

  7. Um, yeah by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 4, Funny

    My husband and I would joke and say I'd bet these devices are listening to what we're saying,"

    Um, yeah ... that's how they know you said commands and stuff. They listen to what you are saying.

  8. "Extremely rare occurrence"??? by mark-t · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Wanna be more specific, Amazon?

    Like, actually say what really caused it to happen so that people can evaluate for themselves just how rare it is?

    Because, you know... if your trustworthiness has already been called into question by evidence that a private conversation was eavesdropped on by your technology, then it makes no reasonable sense to simply take your word for it that whatever caused it to happen was genuinely "rare" at all.

    I'm not saying that Amazon is necessarily lying here... but it makes no sense to actually trust what they are saying about this without being able to evaluate that claim's veracity for ourselves, and the longer they stay quiet, the sooner any honest skepticism can slide into outright disbelief.

  9. Re:Wut by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The rare occurrence was that the audio was sent to a contact,not that it was always recording.

  10. Re:Wut by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's an extremely rare occurrence that the data Amazon wants from you accidentally goes to someone else instead. Who the fuck knows what she's doing if she's able to record an entire conversation and send it to someone. That's not what Alexa's supposed to do. She listens to a command or two and does something for you (plays a song, tells the temperature). Why does the damn thing even have this capability?! This is not a surprise to me in the slightest. And like I'm trying to illustrate here, it would be no surprise to me that Amazon was using these things for ill-gotten gains. Electronically parsing your conversations to find out what advertisements they want to put in front of you and more.

  11. And how were these audio files received? by mkettler · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Part of me wonders what really happened here...

    An Alexa device can make phone calls if set up for it, and they apparently had this person's phone number imported into their Alexa contacts, so they clearly had that feature configured.

    So was this just a case of Alexa making a phone call, without "Daielle" being aware of it? If the call was to a google voice number or similar service, it would just recorded the unanswered call and emailed them. This case would be just a speech activated equivalent of butt-dialing, paired with a google-voice emailed voicemail twist.

    Or was this a case where Amazon generated audio files and then emailed them to some random person out of the contact list?

    I kind kind of understand how the first case could happen by accident, but still be disconcerting. However, the second case would be very disconcerting.

    Given that Amazon is offering to de-provision the communications feature for them, I'm inclined to think this was a "butt dialing" incident, but I'd love to hear some actual details to confirm one way or the other. Clearly the title of the news article is designed to make you think it was the second case, where Alexa recorded the call, not google voice, but there's a lot of vagueness here that makes it unclear.

    --
    -Matt
  12. Obviously a mistake by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They meant to send the audio and contact info to advertisers of hardwood floors. The need to fix their algorithms so the audio gets sent to the correct advertiser.

    --
    I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
  13. active listening by pr0t0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think the obvious difference is that these home assistants by Amazon, Apple, and Google are actively listening by design. I have the Google assistant turned off on my Pixel...I know because it keeps notifying me to turn it on. Now could the mic on my phone or pc be activated by an unscrupulous actor a la "Person of Interest"? Sure. But that seems far less likely than a software glitch in a device that's supposed to be listening to me.

    Amazon is taking steps to make sure this doesn't happen in the future. I already took steps to ensure it would never happen by not buying a device like that.

    --
    I'm sorry, but your opinion seems to be wrong.
  14. "send a voice message" by hawguy · · Score: 4, Informative

    I assume what happened was they triggered the "send a voice message" function in their conversation and their Echo device's volume was turned down and didn't hear the Echo activation beep or see the light. Based on this guide, all you have to do is say something that sounds like "Alexa send a voice message to XXX" and if XXX is a unique contact id, then the Echo sends it without further confirmation.

    https://www.amazon.com/gp/help...

    To send a voice message using a supported Echo device

            1 - Say, "Send a message to [contact name]."
            2 - If the name is similar to other contacts in your address book, Alexa repeats the name back for you to confirm.
            3 - Once you confirm the name, Alexa prompts you for the message.
            4- When you've finished talking, Alexa sends your voice message.

    1. Re:"send a voice message" by 110010001000 · · Score: 4, Funny

      It is more likely that the guy who received it had a phone number very close to the one the NSA uses.

  15. Dave, I've noticed... by goombah99 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Dave, I've noticed your bowel movements are growing in time, so I told the google telephone assistant AI schedule a visit to your doctor.

    Dave, I've noticed your shower runs for more than 5 minutes, and that's a waste of water. I posted this shameful habit to your Baidu page and lowered your Beijing social credit score.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  16. Serious about privacy. by Immerman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You misunderstand - They *do* take privacy very seriously: it interferes with their profit margins and they're doing their best to eliminate it without triggering excessive consumer backlash.

    As yourself this: Does this incident make you substantially less likely to buy or use one of their home surveillance devices, or were you already committed to one camp or the other? If there's no substantial change, then they're doing an effective job of limiting backlash.

    --
    --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.